Well, Whatevs defined my apparently very nerdy question, and made a significant point in the process:
Murder is whatever killing is classified as unlawful in a given society. Without a law to define it, we may have a moral perspective on when a homicide has taken place that is not justified, and we may choose to call it murder, but this is going to end up being a very fluid, and probably very subjective perspective. Further, if the society in question, having abolised a legal definition of murder, doesn't share an essentially unified moral perspective (such as a religious code or philosophy) which is understood and agreed upon by all its members, murder is open to be defined as any homicide, by any individual, at any time. I hope people see the problem with this situation, if not I'll try to elaborate later.
Some people define things differently, and some people only say they do.
I wikied the definitions of both murder and homocide, and their definition of the former was pretty good. See this link.
"Quiiri ath metahn i'ashei?" Chronically Gephyrophobic
Apparantly, legalizing murder would turn life into a giant D&D game, lol.
A bit more natural. Don't you think?
It seems right.
Rape my sister => You die.
Double-cross me and cause me suffering => I beat you up, or kill you.
Rob me => I kill you later, from a distance.
etc. Today's society makes ordinary people put up with way too much crap from the big dogs, that aren't really that big if you stack them against a rifle a block away.
People are just afraid of consequences, and society is all fucked up.
Mightier than the tread of marching armies is the power of an idea whose time has come